PAM. 

».  CATH. 


10  CENTS 


(EHfjat  tfje 

Catfjolic  Cljuvrij 

fjasi  Bone  to  jHextco 

By  DR.  A.  PAGAN  EL 

* * * 

I8itb  a repip  bp 

CARDINAL  FARLEY 

/ 

i ^ 


LATIN-AMERICAN  NEWS  ASSOCIATION 

1400  BROADWAY  X X NEW  YORK.  1916. 


* >i<  * 


3Ufcat  tfje 

Catfjolic  Cfjurcf) 

Jjas  ©one  to  Jflextco 


* * * 


►£•  * * 


(hijjtfJ)  3ilotUii3> 


oaixaltflt  oJ  ano(S  6B({ 


* * 


* 


What  the  Catholic  Church  has  done  to  Mexico. 


A short  historical  sketch  of  the  work  and  influence  wrought  by  the 
Catholic  Church  in  Mexico  since  1521,  will  not  be  found  uninteresting 
to  the  Catholics,  Protestants,  Jews  and  even  the  Mormons  of  this 
country.  American  Catholics  claim  they  do  not  tamper  with  politics; 
that  this  is  one  of  the  reasons  for  their  high  standing  in  the  com- 
munity. Lately,  however,  there  has  been  a change  in  this  policy ; high 
dignitaries  of  the  Church  have  come  out  in  the  press  with  worldly 
opinions  on  subjects  such  as  suffrage  and  Mexican  affairs.  They  have 
attacked  the  representatives  of  the  different  parties  in  Mexico  and 
members  of  the  Wilson  administration  have  not  escaped,  but  this  same 
Church  and  friends  have  consistently  defended  Huerta  and  his  regime, 
and  have  initiated  a campaign  of  agitation  against  the  Constitutional- 
ists in  favor  of  American  Intervention. 

If  the  high  dignitaries  of  the  Catholic  Church  want  to  meddle  in 
politics  then  they  surely  must  not  claim  immunity  from  counter  attacks 
or  hide  under  the  cloak  of  religion  or  of  their  own  sacred  personalities. 
Besides,  the  American  Catholic  laymen  want  to  be  informed  of  both 

sides  of  the  controversy. 

***** 

When  Hernando  Cortez  had  conquered  Mexico  in  1521,  he  soon 
realized  that  soldiers  alone  could  not  control  the  millions  of  Indians 
which  had  come  under  the  rule  of  the  Spanish  king.  Thousands  of 
priests,  nuns  and  friars  were,  therefore,  imported  from  Spain;  the 
priests  soon  settled  in  the  cities  and  the  monks  in  the  country.  They 
established  and  built  monasteries  and  churches  from  Uruguay  to  Cali- 
fornia. In  1524,  four  Bishoprics  were  founded,  in  1571  the  Holy 
Inquisition  was  established  by  the  Dominicans  and  two  years  later  the 
first  “auto  da  fe”  act  of  faith  took  place.  The  Jesuits  arrived  in  Mex- 
ico in  1572.  It  can  be  safely  asserted  that  the  colonization  of  New 
Spain  was  achieved  by  the  different  religious  orders ; they  christianized 
the  Indians  and  made  them  work  on  churches,  monasteries  and  on  their 
farms  for  their  own  benefit. 

The  Jesuits  and  the  Franciscans  did  endeavor  to  foster  learning  in 
the  new  land,  but  with  limited  success,  owing  to  the  fact  that  they 
taught  only  the  sons  of  Spaniards  and  the  Indians  they  taught  to 
memorize  the  prayers  in  their  own  language.  Although  they  were  ex- 
pelled in  1767,  their  work  was  very  useful  and  they  made  themselves 
conspicuous  from  the  other  orders  in  the  zeal  with  which  they  noticed 
the  observances  of  their  own  rules.  They  were  the  teachers  of  the 
creoles  and  mestizos  of  New  Spain,  and  dominated  by  their  science, 
sobriety,  chastity  and  their  insinuating  spirit. 

It  is  a strange  commentary  on  the  logic  of  Catholics  that  they 
consider  the  expulsion  of  religious  orders  from  Mexico  under  the 
Laws  of  the  Reform  (1859)  for  meddling  in  politics,  as  an  unjust 
measure  and  an  attack  on  religious  liberty,  when  as  a fact,  they  never 
protested  when  that  most  Catholic  majesty,  the  king  of  Spain,  Charles 

a 


Ill,  expelled  the  Jesuits  from  Spain  and  from  New  Spain  because  they 
were  accused  of  playing  politics.  Besides,  they  were  suspected  of  enter- 
taining certain  doctrines  on  regicide ; that  is  to  say,  the  right  to  kill 
rulers  when  they  were  tyrants.  There  was  an  attempt  on  the  life  of  the 
Portuguese  sovereign  and  as  the  Jesuits  were  accused  as  being  re- 
sponsible for  it,  they  were  exiled  from  Portugal.  The  same  measures 
were  taken  against  them  in  France.  Not  only  were  the  Jesuits  ex- 
pelled from  Spain  and  the  whole  of  New  Spain,  but  their  property  and 
real  estate  were  confiscated.  They  possessed  great  capitals,  outstand- 
ing loans,  haciendas,  houses  and  churches. 

In  the  three  hundred  years  of  Spanish  rule  in  Mexico  there  were 
sixty-two  viceroys,  out  of  these,  ten  prelates,  mostly  of  the  Dominican 
order,  held  office  as  viceroys  ad  interim.  The  Dominicans  had  been 
the  dominating  power  in  Mexico.  The  influence  of  the  religious 
orders  was  beneficial  until  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Their 
religious  zeal  went  so  far  in  the  beginning,  that  all  vestige  of  Aztec 
and  other  pre-Spanish  civilization  was  destroyed  by  order  of  the  friars. 
Thus  many  very  valuable  historical  documents,  such  as  old  parch- 
ments, books,  maps,  Aztec  statuary,  teaocallis  or  temples,  were  lost  to 
the  world. 

Among  the  most  prominent  representatives  of  the  Church  we  must 
mention  such  men  as  Fray  Vasco  de  Quiroga,  a real  saint  who  was 
venerated  for  his  Christian  virtues.  Fray  Pedro  de  Gante,  related  to 
Charles  V of  Spain,  known  as  a teacher  and  an  organizer  of  schools 
of  industrial  arts.  Fray  Bernardino  de  Sahugan,  author  of  books  on 
pre-Spanish  history,  as  well  as  Fray  Javier  de  Alegre  and  the  famous 
Fray  F.  J.  Clavijero. 

These  names,  as  well  as  others,  should  be  inscribed  on  the  golden 
scroll  of  pre-Spanish  history ; nevertheless  there  is  a seamy  side  to 
this  silver  lining. 

As  soon  as  this  religoius  order  became  wealthy,  the  spiritual  part  of 
its  work  was  neglected  and  a majority  of  the  clergy  became  imbued 
with  the  idea  that  their  power  over  the  colonists  would  be  increased 
with  their  wealth  and  their  political  importance.  Many  prelates  con- 
sidered themselves  superior  to  the  military  and  civil  authorities  as  was 
the  case  with  the  Archbishop  Don  Juan  Perez  de  la  Serna. 

The  then  viceroy,  Marquis  de  Gelnes,  incurred  the  enmity  of  this 
strong-willed  prelate,  who  rebelled  against  the  authority  of  the  viceroy 
and  was  arrested.  Thereupon  De  la  Serna  ex-communicated  all  his 
military  guards  and  later  even  the  viceroy.  Things  came  to  a point 
when  the  Archbishop’s  friends  incited  the  people  to  real  munity ; con- 
victs were  liberated  from  prisons  and  attacked  and  looted  the  royal 
palace.  The  viceroy  had  to  flee  for  his  life,  from  Mexico  to  Spain  and 
when  another  viceroy  was  sent  to  Mexico,  Archbishop  De  la  Serna  was 
asked  to  appear  before  the  King  of  Spain,  who  punished  him  by  mak- 
ing him  Bishop  of  Zamor  in  Spain. 

During  Spanish  rule  in  Mexico  a discussion  arose  in  the  mother 
country  by  a council  of  theologians  as  to  whether  the  Indians  had  a 

4 


soul  and  if  they  were  “gente  de  razon,”  that  is  to  say,  reasoning  beings. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  a question  similar  to  this  came  up  for 
discussion  in  Europe  in  A.  D.  585,  at  the  Council  of  Macon,  as  to 
whether  woman  possessed  a soul.  It  was  finally  decided  that  she  had 
all  the  possibilities  of  one.  In  the  case  of  the  Indian,  they  cut  the 
gordian  knot  by  saying  that  the  Indians  were  men,  but  not  quite  fin- 
ished or  complete,  more  like  children  or  minors  and  that,  therefore, 
they  should  be  subject  to  their  masters  and  protected  by  their  king  and 
the  Church.  It  can  be  readily  imagined  what  kind  of  protection  the 
poor  Indian  received,  especially  with  monks  as  masters.  When  the 
Indians  were  told  that  they  were  under  the  protection  of  the  king  and 
the  Church,  they  answered  resignedly:  “The  king  is  in  Spain  and  God 
is  in  Heaven.” 

The  Inquisition  or  the  Tribunal  of  the  Faith. 

The  Holy  Inquisition  inquired  with  all  available  means  into  the 
thoughts  and  actions  of  men  in  religious  matters.  Not  only  the 
accused  but  likewise  the  informer  were  forced  under  penalty  of  torture 
to  reveal  family  secrets.  The  tribunal  was  secret;  therein  resided 
its  power.  Its  authority  was  unlimited  as  it  did  not  depend  upon  any 
other  court.  In  its  absolutism  it  disposed  without  scruples  of  the 
liberty,  honor,  wealth  and  even  life  of  any  person.  It  imprisoned, 
defamed,  confiscated,  condemned  to  the  “garrote”  (strangulation  by 
means  of  an  iron  collar),  and  it  burned  at  the  stake.  Those  accused 
of  heresy  were  not  confronted  by  their  accuser.  They  were  kept  in 
solitary  confinement,  sometimes  for  years,  until  they  underwent  the 
torture  to  compel  confession. 

Judgment  usually  ended  in  exile,  by  imprisonment  to  the  gallows, 
public  whipping  or  death.  Not  even  the  dead  or  the  absent  escaped 
punishment;  the  bones  of  the  former  were  incinerated,  the  latter  were 
burned  in  effigy.  There  were  special  and  general  “autos  da  fe.”  In 
1596  ten  heretics  were  burned  at  the  stake  in  Mexico  City,  mostly 
Jews  and  Protestants.  An  “auto  da  fe”  was  considered  an  excuse  for 
a feast  day. 

During  the  ten  years  of  the  struggle  for  Independence  the  Inquisi- 
tion persecuted  the  revolutionists  and  the  inquisitors  were  called  the 
agents  of  despotism.  Hidalgo  and  Morelos  were  the  most  conspicuous 
victims  and  martyrs  of  the  Inquisition.  Abad  y Queipo,  Bishop  of 
Michoacan  excommunicated  Hidalgo  in  September,  1810  and  in  De- 
cember of  the  same  year  received  him  under  a pall  in  Valladolid 
(Morelia)  and  celebrated  his  victories  against  the  Spanish  troops  with 
a solemn  “Te  Deum”  in  the  cathedral.  A few  years  later  the  clergy 
became  the  alleged  ally  and  protector  of  the  successful  revolutionists. 

After  the  restoration  of  the  Constitution  (of  1812)  in  Spain,  in  the 
year  1820,  the  Inquisition  was  abolished  in  Mexico  where  it  had  enacted 
its  judgments  for  the  space  of  294  years.  The  building  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion in  Mexico  City  is  now  used  as  the  Academy  of  Medicine.  When 
the  Inquisitorial  office  was  abolished  in  1820,  in  its  dungeons  was  dis- 
covered, according  to  the  account  of  an  eyewitness  “the  Jew  Chrisantos 

5 


Granados,  called  El  Guatemalteco,  true  descendant  of  the  Jews,  who 
had  been  expelled  from  Portugal  in  the  eighteenth  century.  He  had 
on  the  crown  of  his  hat  a treatise  on  logic,  which  was  his  heresy. 
Another  dungeon  was  unsealed  and  from  it  was  taken  out,  one  who 
looked  like  a skeleton,  with  a long  beard.  His  crime  consisted  in 
speaking  in  favor  of  the  Independence.  He  had  also  some  lines  on 
heresy,  because  he  defined  logic  as  the  faculty  of  the  human  mind  to 
direct  all  action  in  order  to  discover  the  truth.  Faint  cries  in  another 
dungeon  brought  the  searchers  to  a naked,  old  man,  who  had  his  hands 
and  feet  in  iron  rings  attached  to  a wooden  cross.  He  had  been  there 
thirty  years.  The  captain  left  the  janitor  like  Adam,  in  order  to 
clothe  the  skeleton  of  this  martyr. 

“There  were  thirty-nine  prisoners  and  they,  thinking  that  they  were 
all  going  to  be  burned,  asked : ‘What  is  yomg  to  happen  to  us  ?’  and  the 
captain  answered : ‘Nothing,  you  are  going  to  be  free,  for  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  year  1812  has  been  sworn  by  his  majesty,  the  King  of 
Spain  and  in  virtue  of  that,  this  cursed  tribunal  is  abolished.’  The 
prisoners  were  taken  before  the  viceroy,  Don  Juan  de  Apodaca,  Count 
of  Venadito,  whp  gave  them  some  money.  Some  had  been  in  prison 
so  many  years  they  knew  nobody  living  in  the  world.  None  knew 
which  way  to  turn  from  the  palace  of  the  viceroy. 

For  three  hundred  years  New  Spain  was  surrounded  by  a Chinese 
wall  of  exclusion ; exclusion  of  foreigners,  of  all  education  which  was 
not  religious  and  all  commercial  intercourse  which  did  not  come  direct- 
ly from  Spain.  A dozen  ships  which  sailed  twice  a year  from  Sevilla 
to  Mexico  brought  all  the  necessities  and  luxuries  needed  for  a popu- 
lation of  several  millions  and  sailed  back  to  the  old  country  laden  with 
the  gold  and  silver  of  Mexico.  The  Index  Expurgatorius  of  the 
Roman  See  saw  to  it  that  no  books  except  inocuous  religious  treaties 
reached  New  Spain.  This  encouraged  smuggling,  intellectual  as  well 
as  commercial. 

A few  years  before  the  struggle  for  Independence  the  population  of 
New  Spain  was  about  5,300,000  inhabitants  which  were  divided  in  this 


manner : 

European  (Spanish)  60,000 

Creoles  ~ 900,000 

Mestizos  1,500,000 

Indians  2,850,000 


Total  5,310,000 


So  there  will  be  observed  that  in  three  hundred  years  the  population 
had  increased  from  a few  million  Indians  and  a handful  of  Spaniards 
to  900,000  creoles  and  a million  and  a half  mestizos. 

Decrees  abolishing  slavery  were  very  numerous,  but  did  not  prevent 
this  system  of  oppression  from  continuing. 

The  contempt  for  the  mestizos  was  a great  factor  in  the  feeling  of 
rebellion  engendered  against  Spanish  rule.  So  great  was  the  contempt 
for  the  mestizos  and  even  the  creoles  by  the  born  Spaniards,  that  one 

6 


of  the  later  viceroys,  after  the  question  of  home  rule  had  arisen,  de- 
clared “that  as  long  as  a Castilian  remained  in  the  country,  though  he 
were  no  more  than  a cobbler,  he  ought  to  rule  in  New  Spain. 

Most  of  the  Spaniards  who  became  wealthy,  returned  to  Spain,  a 
great  many  of  those  who  remained  behind  did  so  because  they  were 
poor.  The  Church  took  deep  roots  in  Mexico,  over  four-fifths  of  the 
land  in  Mexico  was  in  the  hands  of  the  religious  orders  and  the  Church, 
growing  richer,  lost  its  spiritual  hold  on  the  people. 

As  a proof  of  the  ascendancy  of  the  clergy  in  political  matters,  the 
case  of  Mexican  deputies  to  the  Cortez  in  Cadiz  in  1810,  who  were 
almost  all  canons,  may  be  cited. 

The  Dominicans  alone  might  be  said  to  have  furnished  a powerful 
cause  for  the  overthrow  of  Spanish  rule,  at  the  very  time  that  they 
were  laboring  hardest  to  uphold  it  as  it  manifested  signs  of  tottering. 
And  all  the  orders  by  seizing  and  holding  vast  amounts  of  property, 
by  building  churches  and  monasteries  in  times  when  the  people  were 
suffering  the  most  abject  poverty,  and  by  enforcing  the  laws  of  tithes 
and  gaining  control  of  wealth  which  should  have  been  applied  to  en- 
courage industry  and  relieving  the  needs  of  the  people,  conspired  to 
stimulate  the  popular  discontent  which  finally  broke  out  into  the  open 
revolt.  A creole  priest  raised  the  standard  of  revolt  in  Mexico  on 
September  16th,  1810.  His  name  was  Hidalgo,  or  by  his  full  name, 
Miguel  Hidalgo  y Costilla.  He  was  caught,  sentenced  to  death  by  the 
Inquisition  and  his  head  with  that  of  four  of  his  lieutenants  was  stuck 
on  pikes  on  the  four  corners  of  the  public  square,  in  Guanajuato  in 
1811,  where  they  remained  until  1821.  The  greatest  military  genius  of 
the  revolution  was  another  mestizo  priest,  Jose  Maria  Morelos ; there 
were  other  patriot  priests,  Mariano  Matamoros,  Dr.  Cos,  Navarrete, 
and  Torres. 

The  Church  excommunicated  the  partisans  and  authors  of  Mexican 
Independence. 

It  must  be  known  that  the  clergy'  violated  the  secret  of  the  confes- 
sional to  denounce  its  enemies,  which  is  one  of  the  reasons  for  the 
burning  of  the  confessionals  during  the  ten  years’  struggle  for  Inde- 
pendence, in  the  war  of  the  Reform  and  during  the  Constitutionalist 
revolution. 

There  is  historical  proof  of  this.  Don  Manuel  Iturriaga,  canon  of 
Valladolid,  who  was  affiliated  with  the  revolutionary  movement,  on  his 
deathbed,  confessed  everything  and  the  conspiracy  was  discovered  be- 
cause the  father  confessor  violated  the  secret  of  the  confessional. 

Liberalism  in  Spain  threatened  the  great  interests  of  the  Catholic 
Church  in  Mexico  and  therefore  it  demanded  “an  absolute  separation 
from  Spain  and  its  radicalism.” 

The  clergy  began  to  hold  secret  consultations  with  their  closest 
adherents  among  the  “Old  Spaniards,”  and  to  devise  means  whereby 
the  rights  and  prerogatives  of  the  religious  orders  might  be  conserved, 
the  immense  revenues  of  the  Church  saved,  and  the  co-operation  of 
the  people  of  Mexico  (whom  they  had  previously  estranged)  secured 

7 


in  their  interests.  Augustin  de  Iturbide  was  chosen  as  the  tool  by  the 
clergy  to  effect  a union  between  the  Mexican  revolutionists  and  the 
native  army  under  the  orders  of  the  viceroy. 

On  the  21st  of  February,  1821,  Iturbide  succeeded  in  having  the 
plan  of  Iguala  adopted  by  the  revolutionists.  The  first  Constitution 
was  given  the  name  of  the  “Three  Guarantees,”  because  Religion,  In- 
dependence and  Union  were  to  be  symbolized  in  the  national  flag,  with 
the  colors  red,  green  and  white. 

Iturbide’s  defection  broke  Spanish  resistance  and  he  was  appointed 
president  of  the  five  regents  who  represented  the  government  ad 
interim.  In  a turbulent  meeting  of  the  Congress,  from  which  the  re- 
publican members  were  in  a measure  excluded,  Iturbide  was  elected 
Emperor  of  Mexico.  He  abdicated  on  the  20th  of  March,  1823. 

Thirty-six  articles  were  adopted  in  January  to  serve  as  a basis  for  a 
future  Constitution.  The  third  article  of  the  Constitution  read  as 
follows:  “The  Religion  of  the  Mexican  nation  is,  and  will  perpetually 
be  the  Roman  Catholic  Apostolic.  The  nation  will  protect  it  by  wise 
and  just  laws,  and  prohibit  the  exercise  of  any  other  whatever  ” 

Lucas  Alaman  was  the  intellectual  leader  of  the  clerical  party  and 
Antonio  Lopez  de  Santa  Anna  was  its  military  tool. 

In  1832,  Gomez  Farias,  Vice-President,  with  Santa  Anna,  proposed 
the  first  reforms,  that  is  to  say,  the  abolition  of  the  “fueros”  or  privi- 
leges (1)  of  the  clergy  and  army,  the  separation  of  the  Church  and 
State,  including  the  suppression  of  the  monastic  orders  and  more  par- 
ticularly the  abolition  of  the  right  of  the  ecclesiastics  to  interfere  in 
secular  affairs. 

In  1833,  Gomez  Farias  began  a system  of  government  reforms  which 
were  only  put  into  execution  in  1859,  after  the  three  years’  war. 

Santa  Anna  played  the  part  of  the  traitor  and  tool  of  the  Church 
until  at  last  he  was  driven  from  the  country  in  1854,  but  not  until  he 
had  led  his  country  into  two  disastrous  wars  which  lost  Mexico  as 
much  territory  as  is  contained  in  the  whole  of  Mexico  today. 

In  1847,  when  Santa  Anna  was  in  the  field  organizing  an  army  to 
fight  the  Americans,  “Gomez  Farias,  who  was  in  charge  of  the  gov- 
ernment, proposed  a loan  of  four  million  dollars  from  the  Church 
which  was  practically  in  possession  of  all  the  available  wealth  of  the 
country.  The  Church  refused  and  the  clericals  created  dissensions 
among  the  troops  for  the  defense  of  the  country.”  For  a month  the 
streets  of  the  capital  were  scenes  of  wild  confusion  and  violence. 

The  efforts  of  Gomez  Farias  to  obtain  assistance  of  the  Church  in 
the  prosecution  of  the  war  was  resisted  by  the  “Polkos”  (clericals  and 
gilded  youths).  While  the  squadron  of  the  United  States  was  in  the 
Gulf  of  Mexico,  the  “Polkos”  were  seeking  to  make  terms  of  peace 
with  the  United  States,  without  attempting  to  preserve  the  integrity 
of  the  national  territory. 

It  was  the  action  of  the  “Polkos”  that  made  the  war,  on  the  part  of 
the  army  of  the  United  States,  a mere  military  progress  through 
Mexico  from  the  borders  of  the  land  to  the  capital. 

8 


“The  systematic  encouragement  of  desertion  from  Scott’s  army  was 
another  device  in  which  much  reliance  was  placed,  and  the  plan  was 
so  far  successful  that  a certain  number,  principally  Irish  Catholics,  did 
desert  at  Jalapa  and  Puebla.” 

The  war  with  Texas,  with  the  United  States,  French  Intervention, 
were  all  deliberately  planned  by  the  reactionary  party  so  as  to  avoid 
a civil  war  and  unite  all  factions  under  its  flag.  As  we  have  said  be- 
fore, Santa  Anna  was  the  tool  of  the  Church.  The  master  mind  of  the 
clerical  party  was  Lucas  Alaman.  Some  extracts  from  a letter  of 
Lucas  Alaman,  to  the  President-elect  Santa  Anna,  follow : 

“We  are  absolutely  opposed  to  the  federal  system  in  the  matter  of 
elections  which  has  obtained  hitherto  and  the  elective  city  council 
(municipal  home  rule),  and  to  everything  which  bears  any  relation  to 
popular  elections.  . . . And  we  are  persuaded  that  any  and  all  of 
these  things  can  be  satisfactorily  carried  out  without  Congress.  We 
desire,  however,  that  you  proceed  under  the  counsel  of  a few  advisers 
zt'lio  will  outline  your  executive  action.  . . . We  have  the  moral 
strength  of  the  united  clergy,  and  likewise  the  land  owners.  . . . 
For  the  rest  we  do  not  care,  no  matter  what  your  personal  convictions 
may  be.  to  see  you  surrounded  by  flatterers  who  will  influence  you 
. . . you  are  already  possessed  of  our  desires,  of  the  strength  and  the 
support  which  is  ours,  and  we  presume  you  have  the  same  ideas.  If 
it  should  happen  not  to  prove  so,  it  zvill  be  bad  for  the  nation — and 
you.  ...” 

Lucas  Alaman. 

The  advanced  liberals  in  Mexico  promulgated  on  the  21st  of  Novem- 
ber, 1855,  what  is  known  as  the  “Ley  Juarez.”  The  ecclesiastical 
authorities  saw  at  once,  in  the  passage  of  the  “Ley  Juarez”  an  attack 
upon  the  rights  of  the  Church, — their  petted  fueros — and  they  pro- 
tested most  vigorously  against  the  passage  of  the  law. 

The  clerical  opposition  brought  into  prominence  the  Bishop  of 
Puebla,  the  Rt.  Rev.  Pelagio  Antonio  de  Labastida  y Davalos,  who 
had  been  but  recently  advanced  to  the  Episcopate.  In  March,  1854,  he 
anathemized  from  the  pulpit,  as  heretical,  the  doctrines  of  Ocampo  and 
Miguel  Lerdo.  His  zeal  in  that  regard  was  rewarded  by  his  elevation 
to  the  Episcopate.  “Each  proposition  regarding  the  new  Constitution 
was  an  attack  upon  some  abuse  that  had  existed,  perhaps  for  three 
centuries,  and  involved  the  wealth  or  the  influence  of  some  powerful 
class.  It  was  proposed,  for  example,  to  prohibit  forced  laboi, 
monopolies,  alacabalas  (or  interstate  custom  duties),  the  acquisition 
of  property  by  religious  communities.  These  prohibitions  were  sug- 
gested not  as  mere  doctrinaire  theories,  but  as  solutions  of  some  of  the 
social  problems  presented  to  the  reformers  of  the  Constitution.  In 
opposition  to  the  proceedings  of  Congress,  the  Bishops  throughout  the 
country  issued  pastoral  letters  denouncing  the  reform  propositions  and 
the  entire  Constituent  Congress.  They  went  so  far  as  to  excommuni- 
cate certain  officials  in  the  City  of  Mexico,  who  had  been  active  in  ex- 

9 


ecuting  the  “Ley  Lerdo”  as  well  as  all  the  government  officials  and 
even  the  clerks  in  the  offices.” 

In  January,  1856,  the  revolt  broke  out  full  force.  The  garrisons  of 
Morelia,  Michoacan,  Queretaro,  San  Luis  Potosi,  Guadadajara  and 
San  Juan  de  Ulloa  started  “cuartelazos”  munities,  with  the  war  cry: 
“Religion  y Fueros,”  religion  and  privileges,  while  in  Oaxaca,  the 
curates  Carlos  Parro,  Jose  Gabriel  Castellanos  and  Jose  Maria  Garcia, 
together  with  Captain  Bonifacio  Blanco,  headed  a military  uprising 
proclaiming  the  full  establishment  of  the  ecclesiastical  and  military 
privileges,  and  the  upholding  of  the  Catholic  religion  to  the  exclusion 
of  all  others.  In  Jalisco  the  friars  of  the  monastery  of  El  Carmen 
joined  with  the  soldiery  in  a military  revolt. 

As  was  to  be  expected,  the  clericals  were  defeated,  Santa  Anna  was 
driven  into  exile  and  the  Constitution  of  1857  was  proclaimed. 

Article  V says  among  other  things : “The  law,  in  consequence,  does 
not  recognize  monastic  orders,  and  will  not  permit  their  establishment, 
no  matter  what  may  be  the  denomination  or  purpose  for  which  they 
pretend  to  be  established.” 

Article  XXVIII.  “The  State  and  Church  are  independent.  Congress 
cannot  make  any  laws  establishing  or  forbidding  any  religion  . . .” 

The  Archbishop  of  Mexico,  Don  Lazaro  de  la  Garza  announced  in 
circulars  sent  to  the  Bishops  a few  days  after  the  order  for  the  taking 
of  the  oath  had  been  given,  that  since  the  articles  of  this  Constitution 
were  inimical  to  the  institution,  doctrine  and  rites  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  neither  the  clergymen  nor  laymen  could  take  this  oath  under 
any  pretext  whatever.  In  view  of  this  communication  the  Bishops  of 
all  the  dioceses  sent  circulars  to  their  respective  country  vicars  and  the 
parish  curates  and  to  the  other  ecclesiastics,  informing  them,  First: 
That  it  was  not  lawful  to  swear  allegiance  to  the  Constitution  because 
its  articles  were  contrary  to  the  institution,  doctrines  and  rites  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  Second : That  the  communication  must  be  made 
public  and  copies  of  it  distributed  as  widely  as  possible.  Third : That 
those  who  had  taken  this  oath  must  retract  it  at  the  confessional  and 
make  this  retraction  as  public  as^  possible,  and  they  must  notify  the 
government  of  their  action. 

Not  satisfied  with  this,  the  clericals  induced  Pope  Pius  IX  to  issue 
a bull  or  mandate  to  disobey  utterly  the  commands  of  the  impious  lib- 
eral government.  Part  of  this  document  is  as  follows : “Thus  we 
make  known  to  the  faith  in  Mexico  and  to  the  Catholic  universe,  that 
we  energetically  condemn  every  decree  that  the  Mexican  government 
has  enacted  against  the  Catholic  religion,  against  the  Church  and  her 
sacred  ministers  and  pastors,  against  her  laws,  rights  and  property  and 
also  against  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See.  We  raise  our  Pontifical 
voice  with  apostllic  freedom  before  you,  to  condemn,  reprove  and  de- 
clare null,  void,  and  without  any  value,  the  said  decrees  and  all  others 
which  have  been  acted  by  the  civil  authorities  in  such  contempt  of  the 
ecclesiastical  authority  of  this  Holy  See,  and  with  such  injury  to  the 
religion,  to  the  sacred  pastors  and  illustrious  men.” 

10 


This  remarkable  document  of  the  vicar  of  Christ  on  earth  had  its 
effect;  “the  friars  patrolled  the  trenches  of  the  revolting  soldiery  in 
Mexico  City,  exciting  them  to  fight;  then  as  in  1847,  the  clergy  paid 
the  wages  of  the  troops,  and  their  agents  were  bribing  the  officers  of 
the  government  that  swells  the  ranks  of  the  enemy.” 

In  spite  of  all  the  excommunications  and  papal  bulls,  the  liberals 
were  victorious  in  the  end  and  on  the  11th  of  June,  1861,  Juarez,  the 
pure  blooded  Indian  was  proclaimed  Constitutional  President  of 
Mexico. 

President  Juarez  expelled  some  foreign  diplomats  who  had  meddled 
in  the  political  affairs  of  Mexico  by  favoring  the  reactionary  elements. 
This  was  done  to  the  Archbishop  of  Mexico,  the  Bishop  of  Michoacan 
and  some  high  members  of  the  clergy.  As  a consequence  of  this  act, 
the  French  minister  Saligny,  the  clergy  and  the  clericals,  Jose  M. 
Gutierrez  Estrada,  Jose  Manuel  Hidalgo  and  General  Juan  N.  Almonte 
asked  Napoleon  III  to  intervene  in  Mexico.  French  intervention  took 
place  between  1861  and  1865.  This  is  what  a French  officer  has  to  say 
about  the  behavior  of  the  French  soldiers  in  Mexico:  “First  of  all 
they  (the  French)  do  not  take  any  more  prisoners  and  the  wounded 
are  killed.  It  is  a real  war  of  savages,  unworthy  of  the  Europeans.” 
(Lieutenant  G.  Coine.) 

The  United  States  recognized  Juarez  as  the  Constitutional  president. 
In  1867  the  liberals,  under  Juarez,  defeated  and  drove  out  the  French 
and  in  the  same  year  they  were  victorious  against  the  clericals  who  sup- 
ported Maximilian.  On  the  19th  of  May,  1867,  Maximilian,  Miramon 
and  Mejia  were  judged  and  condemned  to  death. 

Then  followed  the  presidency  of  Juarez,  Lerdo  de  Tejada  and  Por- 
firio  Diaz. 

Diaz  came  in  as  a revolutionary  president  and  ended  in  his  old  age 
as  a supporter  of  the  renascent  Catholic  party.  During  the  War  of 
the  Reform  and  French  Intervention,  three  generals  were  at  the  head 
of  the  clericals:  Leonardo  Marquez,  Miramon  and  Mejia.  The  first 
one  managed  to  escape  after  the  fall  of  the  Empire  and  he  lived  in 
Havana  in  exile  until  1898,  when  he  came  back  to  Mexico.  At  this 
time  Porfirio  Diaz  was  slowdy,  but  surely,  showing  tendencies  of  going 
back  to  the  old  regime  and  Leonardo  Marquez,  Don  Francisco  Elguero 
and  Sanchez  Santos,  who  was  editor  of  a Catholic  paper  called  El  Pais, 
collaborated  with  Diaz  in  this  sense,  that  they  were  the  originators  of 
the  new  Catholic  party  of  Mexico.  Helping  them  were  Francisco  de 
la  Hoz,  Francisco  Pascual  Garcia,  Eduardo  Tamariz  and  Fernando 
Somellera.  Francisco  Elguero  controlled  the  clergy  in  Michoacan  and 
represented  A.  and  E.  Noriega,  Spaniards,  in  the  question  of  the  drain- 
age of  the  Cienega  de  Zacapu  (Mich)  when  they  despoiled  thousands 
of  Indians  of  their  lands,  including  over  fifty  square  miles.  It  is  well 
to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  Inigo  Noriega,  cousin  of  A.  and  E. 
Noriega,  was  known  by  popular  opinion  to  be  a silent  partner  of  Por- 
firio Diaz.  Fernando  Somellera  was  entirely  under  the  influence  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Mexico  and  collaborated  with  him  and  was  assisted  by 

11 


Carmelita  Diaz,  wife  of  Porfirio  Diaz.  As  Porfirio  Diaz  was  getting 
older,  so  the  ascendancy  of  Carmelita  Diaz  increased.  The  efforts  of 
the  Protestants  in  creating  industrial  schools  and  churches  in  the  north 
of  Mexico,  accelerated  the  formation  of  the  secret  Catholic  party  which 
laid  its  plans  to  counteract  the  influence  of  the  Protestants  by  creating 
Catholic  schools  all  over  the  country,  under  the  tuition  of  priests  and 
nuns,  which  were  imported  by  the  efforts  of  Mrs.  Diaz.  Priests,  nuns 
and  friars  were  imported  from  France,  the  same  ones  that  had  been 
expelled  from  their  country,  from  Spain;  some  came  from  the  United 
States.  In  1904  some  American  nuns  were  brought  from  Mobile, 
and  Atlanta,  and  they  built  a convent  sixteen  miles  from  the  capital. 
Many  Mexicans  became  suspicious  of  these  surreptitious  immigrations 
and  Felix  Diaz,  then  chief  of  police  under  Porfirio  Diaz,  raided  the 
first  convent  in  1905  and  sent  the  inmates  back  to  France.  Several 
raids  by  Felix  Diaz  followed  and  three  shiploads  of  nuns  were  osten- 
sibly sent  back  to  the  old  country,  but  when  the  ships  stopped  at  Pro- 
greso, the  nuns  landed  there  and  after  a while  returned  to  Mexico. 

The  raids  took  place  under  the  direction  of  Felfz  Diaz,  and  the 
round  trip  tickets  of  the  peripatetic  nuns  were  paid  by  Carmelita 
Diaz.  It  was  a game  of  hide  and  seek,  with  the  advantage  on  the  side 
of  the  wife  of  the  “Old  Man.” 

Carmelita  Diaz  was  so  certain  that  the  religious  orders  had  come  to 
stay  that  she  informed  the  nuns  to  entertain  no  fear  as  to  their  safety 
as  she  was  in  a position  to  let  them  know  of  any  action  which  might 
be  taken  against  them. 

The  Madero  revolution  was  unexpected  in  its  suddenness  and  vio- 
lence. It  took  everybody  by  surprise,  the  porfiristas,  the  cientificos, 
the  clericals,  Europe  as  well  as  America. 

By  forcing  the  elimination  of  Diaz  from  power,  the  reactionary  ele- 
ment saved  the  day  for  a while,  especially  as  the  clerical  and  reaction- 
ary F.  L.  de  la  Barra  was  successfully  placed  in  the  provisional  presi- 
dency. De  la  Barra  prepared  the  way  for  the  overthrow  of  the  Madero 
regime  by  working  unceasingly  in  conjunction  with  the  Catholic  party 
in  Mexico  and  in  Washington,  to  discredit  the  new  political  order  as 
represented  by  Madero.  The  hew  Catholic  party  came  openly  into 
being  in  1911,  when  it  put  forth  F.  I.  Madero  as  president  and  F.  L.  de 
la  Barra  as  vice-president.  Once  the  ticket  was  in  power  there  would 
have  been  found  a way  of  eliminating  Madero ; unluckily  for  the 
renascent  Catholic  party,  De  la  Barra  was  defeated  at  the  polls.  In 
Congress  the  Catholic  party  was  represented  by  Elguero  and  F.  de  la 
H©z  and  the  opposition  by  F.  Iglesias  Calderon,  Luis  Cabrera,  J. 
Urueta,  Serapio  Rendon  and  others.  The  Catholic  party  had  made 
Madero  its  candidate,  hoping  to  use  him  to  its  ends,  but  when  it  was 
discovered  that  Madero  was  not  amenable  to  reason,  it  began  opposing 
him  bitterly,  taking  sides  with  every  revolutionary  movement  which 
was  initiated  during  the  Madero  regime,  among  which  were  tfhe 
Orozco,  Reyes,  Felix  Diaz  revolts  and  later  the  Huerta  treachery. 

During  the  tragic  ten  days  in  Mexico  City,  when  Madero  was  assas- 

12 


-sinated,  the  high  Catholic  clergy  favored  the  assassins  in  many  ways 
and  later  furnishing  Huerta  with  forty  million  pesos  to  suppress  the 
revolution.  The  Catholic  prelates  did  not  trust  Felix  Diaz  because  of 
his  well  known  raids  of  convents  and,  therefore,  they  did  not  offer  him 
the  presidency,  but  concentrated  all  their  efforts  on  Huerta,  until  they 
succeeded  in  putting  him  in  power. 

Although  Huerta’s  friends  claim  that  he  was  innocent  of  the  murder 
of  Madero  by  direct  order,  nevertheless  it  is  an  open  secret  that 
Rodolfo  Reyes  demanded  the  heads  of  Madero,  Suarez  and  Basso,  in 
revenge  for"  his  father’s  death  ; the  other  members  of  the  cabinet  de- 
manded the  head  of  Gustavo  Madero,  who  was  murdered  in  the  citadel 
where  Felix  Diaz  had  his  headquarters. 

Huerta’s  professional  secret  is  a secret  of  polichinelle,  as  every  child 
knows  that  the  murderous  deed  was  a stepping  stone  to  his  dictator- 
ship. Huerta  was  the  tacit  accessory  to  the  crime.  No  matter  how 
many  palliatory  arguments  the  Mexican  and  American  clericals  may 
give  to  white-wash  their  good  friend  Huerta,  he  can  exclaim  as  Lady 
Macbeth:  “Here’s  the  smell  of  blood  still;  all  the  perfumes  of  Arabia 
will  not  sweeten  this  little  hand.” 

One  of  Huerta’s  great  political  blunders  was  the  naming  of  the 
clerical  E.  Tamariz  as  minister  of  public  instruction,  thus  giving  one 
of  the  most  important  portfolios  to  the  Catholics.  The  whole  Congress 
protested  most  vigorously  and  it  was  then  that  the  dictator  had  them 
all  put  in  jail,  except  the  Catholic  members,  and  then  named  a Congress 
of  his  own. 

Doctor  Urrutia,  a pupil  of  the  Jesuit  College,  was  the  Iago  of  the 
clerical  party,  his  friendship  and  influence  over  Huerta  served  him 
admirably,  having  been  his  political  mentor  and  prompter  since  1908, 
when  Diaz  was  still  in  power.  The  great  chance  arrived  during 
Madero’s  regime.  As  Huerta  was  only  a soldier  and  not  a politician, 
the  clerical  party  picked  out  Dr.  Urrutia  as  a president  molder  and 
accelerator.  Up  to  that  time  Dr.  Urrutia  was  known  as  the  most  bril- 
liant and  successful  surgeon  in  Mexico. 

When  Huerta  achieved  power  Dr.  Urrutia  became  a member  of  his 
cabinet  and  official  executioner  of  the  most  important  enemies  of  his 
regime : scores  of  well  known  victims  disappeared  mysteriously,  among 
them  a senator,  Belsario  Dominguez  and  an  anti-clerical  deputy,  the 
Lie.  Serapio  Rendon.  Dr.  Urrutia  was  the  most  powerful,  dreaded, 
hated  man  in  Mexico ; he  was  the  modern  inquisitor  and  hangman  of 
the  clerical  party ; but  instead  of  cowing  the  Mexicans  into  submission, 
he  drove  the  best  element  into  the  arms  of  the  new  revolution. 

But  the  clericals  soon  discovered  to  their  discomfiture  that  Huerta, 
with  all  his  ruthlessness,  his  cunning,  cruelties,  and  his  much-vaunted 
strength,  was  really  losing  his  grip  on  Mexico  and  that  he  had  very 
little  chance  of  being  recognized  by  the  Washington  administration, 
therefore,  they  began  casting  about  for  another  clerical  presidential 
possibility.  Dr.  Urrutia  was  chosen  as  the  only  convenient  and 
•obedient  instrument  of  the  Church.  Thereupon  the  high  clergy  began 

13 


to  conspire  the  “accidental  removaP  of  the  dictator.  A letter  from  the 
Archbishop  of  Michoacan  to  Dr.  Urrutia  revealed  the  intrigue.  It 
says  in  part : “My  profound  sympathy  and  affection  for  you  make  me 
fear  that  these  men’s  intrigues  might  put  an  obstacle  on  the  path  that 
our  Lord  and  Blessed  Mother  have  put  before  you  to  climb  to  the  cul- 
minating position  of  Chief  Executive  of  the  Republic,  which  position 
will  require  of  you  the  greatest  sacrifice,  but  will  at  the  same  time  lay 
before  you  a vast  field  in  which  to  exercise  your  activity  for  the  glory 
and  honor  of  God  and  for  the  benefit  of  our  beloved  country.” 

Huerta  got  wind  of  this  little  scheme  to  eliminate  him,  and  sent 
his  agents  to  arrest  Dr.  Urrutia  and  the  conspiring  prelates.  Dr. 
Urrutia  escaped  by  the  skin  of  his  teeth  to  Vera  Cruz,  where  he  begged 
the  protection  of  Gen.  Funston  against  the  infuriated  Mexicans  who 
were  ready  to  lynch  him.  All  the  Mexican  Bishops  and  Archbishops, 
involved  in  the  plot,  fled  from  the  wrath  of  Huerta  and  placed  them- 
selves under  the  protection  of  the  clerical  Brazilian  minister  who 
represented  the  United  States.  Later  they  were  smuggled  out  of 
Mexico  City.  The  American  press  gave  as  reason  for  their  sudden 
escape  from  Mexico  an  alleged  conspiracy  to  get  rid  of  them  by  the 
Constitutionalists,  although  at  that  time  they  controlled  neither  Mexico 
City  nor  Vera  Cruz. 

Vera  Cruz  became  the  center  of  political  intrigue  under  the  protec- 
tion of  the  American  flag,  against  Huerta,  against  the  Constitutionalists 
and  in  favor  of  intervention,  that  is  to  say,  in  favor  of  a quick  march 
and  occupation  of  Mexico  City  by  the  American  troops. 

One  of  the  reasons  for  the  insistent  demand  that  Vera  Cruz  should 
be  put  under  American  control,  was  that  that  seaport  was  an  ideal  spot 
for  revolutionary  intrigue,  first  for  its  nearness  to  the  capital  and 
secondly  because  the  clericals,  under  the  shadow  of  the  American  flag, 
could  continue  formenting  revolts  until  a clerical  had  been  placed  in 
power  in  Mexico  City.  The  disappointment  was  great  when  the  Amer- 
ican troops  left  and  Carranza’s  soldiers  entered  the  city  of  Vera  Cruz. 

Nuns,  friars,  priests  .prelates,  ex-federals,  ex-cabinet  members,  all 
the  revolutionary  rig  raff  of  Mexico,  which  had  been  playing  politics, 
left  for  Havana  and  the  United  States.  The  exiled  Catholics  were 
received  by  their  fellow  believers  in  the  United  States  and  soon  after- 
wards all  the  Catholic  dailies,  weeklies,  monthlies  were  filled  with 
stories  of  alleged  persecutions  and  rapes  and  robberies  committed  by 
the  revolutionists. 

A pamphlet,  relating  all  these  atrocities,  was  published  in  Chicago, 
containing  articles  with  replies  to  a pamphlet  by  John  Lind  and  another 
by  Col.  I.  C.  Enriquez,  a Mexican  Catholic  who  had  fought  under  Gen- 
eral Obregon  and  who  denied  the  charges  made  by  the  exiles  and  their 
friends  in  the  United  States.  The  answer  in  this  lurid  pamphlet  was 
ostensibly  signed  by  an  American  Catholic  priest,  but  had  really  been 
written  by  the  Mexican  editor  of  “El  Pais”  (a  Catholic  daily  in  Mexico- 
City)  and  translated  for  the  benefit  of  the  American  author  who  never 
knew  anything  about  Mexican  history  until  the  pamphlet  was  printed. 

14 


The  fourth  edition  of  this  booklet  ran  to  almost  100,000  copies,  at 
fifteen  cents  a copy,  so  you  can  figure  out  for  yourself  that  this  Chris- 
tian shepherd  reaped  from  the  alleged  sufferings  of  the  political 
martyrs  a financial  bonanza. 

The  strangest  part  of  this  so-called  religious  persecutions  is  a fact 
which  stands  out  glaringly,  and  that  is  that  no  Protestant  clergymen 
were  ever  molested  in  Mexico. 

Why  should  the  Indians  and  the  middle  class  Mexicans,  who  are  all 
Catholics,  want  to  persecute  and  drive  out  their  own  “sky  pilots”  unless 
they  had  meddled  in  politics  and  taken  sides  with  the  oppressors,  thus 
placing  themselves  outside  the  pale  of  the  law  ? Why  is  it  that  the 
lower  clergy  has  remained  in  Mexico  and  continues  to  attend  to  its 
spiritual  duties  without  being  molested  by  the  Constitutionalists? 

This  simple  fact  destroys  all  the  statements  published  by  tbe  Ameri- 
can Catholic  press  that  the  Constitutionalists  are  persecuting  the  Cath- 
olic religion.  What  the  revolutionists  have  really  been  doing  was  to 
weed  out  and  extirpate  forever  the  political  scum  and  interlopers  in 
Mexico. 

While  the  American  troops  were  in  possession  of  Vera  Cruz,  a list 
was  made  by  General  Jose  Refugio  Velasco,  of  all  the  ex-federal  gen- 
erals who  were  in  that  port,  this  list  showing  that  there  were  more 
than  450  ex-federal  generals  plotting  more  trouble  under  the  protection 
of  the  American  flag. 

This  proves  the  harmful  influence  of  unwarranted  foreign  occupa- 
tion. While  the  American  troops  were  supposed  to  be  doing  good  by 
enforcing  peace  and  tbe  respect  of  rights,  they  were  harboring  a nest 
of  trouble  brewers,  thereby  making  more  difficult  the  already  difficult 
task  undertaken  by  Don  Venustiano  Carranza — that  of  pacifying  the 
Republic. 

It  is  also  shown  that  Major  Frank  Joyce,  an  officer  of  the  14th  Regi- 
ment of  Artillery,  which  was  sent  to  Vera  Cruz,  showed  more  than  the 
usual  interest  in  getting  together  stories  told  by  the  refugees,  of  atro- 
cities and  persecutions  against  monks  and  nuns,  without  troubling  him- 
self to  find  out  whether  those  stories  were  true  or  not.  They  were 
stories  of  monks  having  been  shot  in  Guadalajara,  and  of  nuns  who 
had  been  outraged  by  the  soldiers.  Allowing  that  anything  of  the  kind 
might  have  happened  in  isolated  instances,  it  was  the  exception  and 
not  the  rule,  and  if  Major  Joyce  had  taken  the  trouble,  he  would  have 

found  that  most  of  the  stories  told  him  were stories,  told  for  the 

purpose  of  capturing  the  sympathies  of  an  unsuspecting  public,  which 
did  not  know  that  the  laws  of  Mexico  expressly  forbid  the  presence  of 
religious  orders,  under  any  pretext  whatever. 

Those  stories  Major  Joyce  carefully  gathered  and  sent  copies  to 
Cardinal  Farley  and  to  the  Hon.  William  J.  Bryan  in  Washington. 
Father  Carlos  de  Heredia,  who,  while  in  New  York,  stopped  at  the 
Church  of  St.  Francis  Xavier,  making  a trip  to  Washington  in  Decem- 
ber, 1914,  where  he  had  a conference  with  Secretary  Bryan.  He  left 
immediately  afterwards  for  Havana,  to  interview  the  monks  and  nuns 

15 


in  that  city,  under  instructions  of  Cardinal  Farley.  Major  Joyce 
pushed  his  zeal  to  such  an  extent  as  to  make  a trip  to  Mexico  City  in- 
cognito, just  to  see  if  he  could  get  hold  of  anything  on  which  he  could 
make  more  charges  against  the  Constitutionalists. 

Mr.  S.  Augusto  Zubieta  declared  that  he  knew  that  the  last  effort 
of  the  Catholic  party  was  to  back  a new  revolutionary  movement,  at 
the  head  of  which  they  wanted  to  place  Felix  Diaz  and  General  Itur- 
bide.  The  Catholic  party  had  already  put  in  the  hands  of  Felix  Diaz, 
through  an  American  prelate,  a check  for  ONE  HUNDRED  THOU- 
SAND DOLLARS,  with  which  Don  Felix  was  to  go  to  Havana  to 
rally  his  followers  and  begin  his  preparation  to  start  a new  revolution. 
Their  plan  was  to  charter  vessels  which  would  land  arms  and  ammuni- 
tion on  the  Isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  from  which  they  would  work  into 
Oaxaca  and  there  begin  operation  against  Carranza. 

All  this  was  being  done  with  the  active  support  of  the  Catholic  party 
in  the  United  States,  which  influenced  by  the  false  reports  circulated 
by  the  enemies  of  the  Constitutionalists  had  from  the  beginning  antag- 
onized the  revolution. 

Herewith  is  printed  an  affidavit,  written  and  sworn  to  by  Mr.  S.  A. 
Zubieta,  a Mexican  Catholic  and  an  ex-federal  officer: 

I,  Salvador  A.  Zubieta,  do  hereby  declare  that  on  or  about  December, 

1914  and  January,  1915,  I had  occasion  to  meet  Cardinal and 

talking  over  the  Mexican  situation,  we  discussed  several  questions  of 
importance,  among  them  the  alleged  actions  of  Carranza  against  the 
Catholic  Church  and  he  confided  to  me  that  the  Catholics  in  this  coun- 
try were  disposed  to  back  a new  revolution,  of  which  Felix  Diaz  was 
to  be  the  head.  The  instigator  of  this  movement  is  the  well  known 
murderer,  Cecilio  Ocon,  who  seems  to  have  gained  the  ear  and  the  con- 
fidence of  Cardinal  , the  said  Cardinal  having  believed  unques- 

tioningly  all  the  false  representations  made  by  this  unscrupulous  mur- 
derer. The  Cardinal  also  asked  if  I would  help  in  this,  probably  be- 
cause he  thought  my  family  connections  in  Mexico  and  the  fact  of  my 
being  a Catholic,  would  gain  some  advantage  to  the  cause.  Cardinal 

also  stated  that  many  Catholic  institutions  in  this  country  were 

ready  to  back  this  movement  with  about  ten  million  dollars. 

New  York  City,  February  27th,  1915. 

(Signed)  Sal.  Augusto  Zubieta. 

State  of  New  York  1 S.S. 

County  of  New  York) 

Sworn  before  me  this  27th 
day  of  February,  1915. 

(Signed)  W.  J.  Berow, 

Notary  Public, 

New  York  County  No.  374. 

New  York  Reg.  No.  5255. 

[seal] 

William  J.  Berow, 

Notary  Public, 

New  York  County. 


16 


This  remarkable  document  proves  two  things : one  that  the  Catholic 
party  in  the  United  States  is  playing  politics  surreptitiously,  and  sec- 
ondly, that  it  is  not  doing  it  intelligently.  If  the  history  of  the  rise  and 
downfall  of  the  political  power  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Europe  is  not 
an  obvious  lesson  to  the  Catholic  politicians  in  America,  certainly  the 
defeat  of  its  political  power  in  Mexico  should  be  a warning. 

The  religious  strength,  dogmas  and  spirituality  of  the  Catholic 
Church  cannot  be  discussed  here  as  not  belonging  to  this  argument.  It 
is  the  same  old  story.  It  begins  everywhere  modestly,  keeping  to  its 
spiritual  duties.  Slowly,  but  surely,  it  acquires  wealth,  real  estate,  a 
press  of  its  own  and  then  falls  to  the  all-mastering  ambition  and  is 
tempted  to  play  politics — which  is  invariably  followed  by  its  political 
elimination. 

If  the  master  minds  in  Rome  were  defeated  and  lost  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Church  in  Italy,  where  the  Catholics  are  in  a majority, 
how  can  picayune  clerical  politicians  in  the  United  States  hope  to 
control  America  politically,  where  the  Catholics  are  in  a minority? 

After  forty  years  of  hostility  to  the  Italian  Government  the  Holy  See 
realized  its  mistake  and  made  advances.  In  an  interview  with  Italian 
Catholics,  Pope  Benedict  XV  stated  that  the  Italian  Catholics  should  be 
first  of  all  Italians.  This  was  said  to  offset  the  publicity  given  by  the 
enemies  of  the  Holy  See  that  the  interests  of  the  Catholic  Church  were 
with  Austria  and  its  political  integrity,  as  against  Italy  and  its  govern- 
ment, which  had  despoiled  it  of  its  temporal  power. 

This  attitude  of  the  present  Pope  was  not  only  eminently  Christian 
but  also  statesmanlike.  Pope  Benedict  XV  ought  to  be  and  he  will  be 
informed  of  the  intrigues  of  the  Mexican  prelates  and  the  Mexican 
clergy  to  foment  revolutions  and  bloodshed  so  as  to  incite  the  Ameri- 
can Government  to  intervene  in  Mexico. 

To  prove  that  the  Mexican  prelates  now  exiled  in  the  United  States 
are  not  in  sympathy  with  Mexican  aims,  struggles  and  sufferings  we 
quote  the  following  from  the  “Pueblo”  in  Vera  Cruz,  March  26th,  1915. 

A protest  from  the  Catholic  priests  in  Mexico. 

To  Don  Venustiano  Carranza,  Chief  of  the  Constitutionalist  army  and 
in  charge  of  the  Executive  Power  of  the  Union : 

“We,  the  undersigned  Catholic  priests  of  the  Archbishopric  of  Mex- 
ico, take  pleasure  in  stating  that  it  is  with  regret  and  disapproval  that 
we  have  seen  a number  of  Catholic  refugees  in  foreign  countries,  acting 
on  the  advice  and  under  the  influence  of  an  association  which  with  the 
pretext  of  protecting  the  Catholic  cause,  has  long  been  trying  to  inter- 
fere in  our  national  affairs,  address  a petition  to  a foreign  government 
for  the  protection  of  the  Church  in  Mexico.  We  protest  to  you  that 
none  of  us  have  taken  part  in  these  measures  which  we  consider  anti- 
patriotic  and  unnecessary.  It  is  true  that  we  have  to  lament  several 
injuries  in  persons  and  things  pertaining  to  the  cult  and  service  of  the 
Church,  but  we  consider  all  this  a sad  consequence  of  the  revolution 
which  has  affected  our  country  in  its  very  foundation,  and  which,  on 

17 


tearing  up  many  harmful  elements,  sweeps  away  at  the  same  time,  with 
irresistable  force,  others  which  are  harmless ; but  we  confess  that  on 
part  of  the  most  distinguished  personalities  of  the  revolution,  we  have 
received  attentions  for  which  we  are  thankful,  and  many  times  also, 
the  guarantees  to  which  we  are  entitled  as  Mexican  citizens.  We  trust 
therefore,  without  resorting  to  any  foreign  power,  to  succeed  in  obtain- 
ing all  the  guarantees  and  rights  consistent  with  the  laws  that  govern 
us,  which  will  permit  us,  far  from  all  political  action,  to  devote  our- 
selves to  the  moralization  of  the  poor  and  to  the  pacification  of  our 
•country,  on  the  basis  of  the  respect  which  is  due  to  the  constituted 
authority  and  fraternity  of  all  Mexicans.  Please  accept  this  mani- 
festation of  our  feelings  and  our  gratitude  and  respect.” 

Following  are  the  signatures  of  the  Catholic  priests : 

Dr.  Antonio  J.  Paredes,  Vicar  General  of  the  Archbishopric  of 
Mexico;  Jose  Cortes,  rector;  Silvestre  Hernandez,  Clemente  M. 
Cordoba,  Francisco  9.  Alvarez,  Manuel  Rodriguez  F.,  Edoardo  D. 
Paredes,  Bruno  Martinez,  Guillermo  Trischler,  Gerardo  Anaya,  Augus- 
tin Alvarez,  Domingo  Rojas,  Felipe  de  la  O,  Manuel  Cadenas,  Alberto 
•Gosca. 

Then  followed  the  signatures  of  several  Spanish  priests. 

This  manifesto  or  protest  of  the  Mexican  Catholic  priests  should  be  a 
salutary  lesson  in  ethics  and  Christianity  to  the  militant  Catholic  pol- 
iticians and  trouble-makers  in  the  United  States. 

The  historical  facts  in  this  pamphlet  are  taken  from  the  following 
authors : 

From  Empire  to  Republic,  A.  H.  Noll;  Historia  del  Pueblo  Mex- 
icano,  Carlos  Pereyra ; De  la  Dictatura  a la  Anarquia,  Ramon  Prida ; 
A Short  History  of  Mexico,  A.  H.  Noll;  The  United  States  and  Mex- 
ico, 1821-1848,  G.  L.  Rives;  The  Mexican  People  and  their  struggle 
for  Freedom,  L.  G.  de  Lara  and  E.  Pinchon ; Mexico  a traves  de  los 
siglos ; Compendio  de  la  Historia  de  Mexico,  L.  P.  Verdia. 

The  American  Catholic  papers  have  advertised  the  news  that  millions  of 
property  belonging  to  the  Catholic  Church  in  Mexico,  had  been  either  destroyed 
or  confiscated  by  the  Constitutionalists.  The  Catholic  Church  in  Mexico  has 
not  owned  any  property  since  1859  and  even  the  churches  are  government  prop- 
erty which  are  rented  out  to  the 'clergy.  The  fact  that  religious  orders  are  for- 
bidden to  stay,  in  other  words,  are  outlawed  in  Mexico,  was  never  mentioned 
by  the  Catholic  clergy.  All  through  the  revolution  prominent  Catholics  and  the 
Catholic  press  have  attacked  the  Constitutionalists  either  in  ignorance  or  bad 
faith.  A continuation  of  a campaign  of  misstatements,  hostility  and  hatred  by 
the  American  Catholics,  will  only  succeed  in  driving  the  Mexicans  to  do  what 
the  Catholics  fear  most:  they  will  throw  them  into  the  arms  of  the  Protestant 
Church,  which  will  act  as  a healthy  balance  against  the  political  designs  of  the 
Catholic  Church. 

Extracts  from  the  Laws  of  the  Reform. 

Law  of  July  21st,  1859. 

Art.  3.  There  shall  be  perfect  independence  between  the  affairs  of 
the  State  and  the  affairs  purely  ecclesiastical.  The  government  will 
limit  itself  to  protecting  with  its  authority  the  public  worship  of  the 
•Catholic  religion  and  any  other  religion. 

18 


Art.  4.  The  ministers  of  the  faith  for  the  administration  of  the 
sacraments  and  other  religious  functions  will  be  permitted  to  accept 
gifts  and  oblations  offered  in  return  for  services  rendered,  but  neither 
gifts  nor  indemnities  shall  be  rendered  in  the  form  of  real  estate. 

Art.  5.  The  existent  religious  orders,  irrespective  of  denomination 
or  for  what  purpose  created,  and  all  arch  confraternities,  confraternities 
and  brotherhoods  connected  with  the  religious  communities  and  the 
cathedrals,  parishes  or  any  churches,  shall  be  suppressed  throughout 
the  entire  republic. 

Art.  6.  The  foundation  and  erection  of  new.  convents  or  religious 
orders  of  archconfraternities,  confraternities  or  brotherhoods  of  what- 
ever form  or  appellation  is  prohibited.  Likewise  the  wearing  of  the 
garb  of  the  suppressed  orders  is  forbidden. 

Law  of  December  14th,  1874. 

First  Section. 

Art.  1.  The  State  and  the  Church  are  independent  of  each  other. — 

No  one  will  be  empowered  to  dictate  laws  establishing  or  prohibiting 
any  religion ; but  the  State  exercises  authority  over  them,  in  relation 
to  the  conservation  of  public  order  and  the  respect  of  its  institutions. 

Art.  2.  The  State  in  the  Republic  guarantees  the  exercise  of  all 
cults. — 

It  will  prosecute  and  punish  only  those  practices  and  acts,  authorized 
by  some  cult,  which  may  be  in  violation  of  our  penal  laws. 

Second  Section. 

Art.  14.  No  religious  institution  may  acquire  real  estate  or  capital 
invested  in  real  estate  with  the  exception  of  the  temples  to  be  used 
solely  for  the  public  service  of  the  cult  or  the  buildings  which  may  be 
strictly  necessary  for  such  service. 

Third  Section. 

Art.  19.  The  State  does  not  recognize  any  monastic  order  nor  can 
it  permit  their  establishment,  no  matter  what  the  denomination  or 
object  under  which  they  may  have  been  created. — 

The  Secret  orders  which  have  been  established  shall  be  considered 
as  illegal  and  the  authorities  can  dissolve  them  should  their  members 
live  in  Communities ; and  in  any  case,  their  chiefs,  superiors  or  direc- 
tors will  be  judged  as  guilty  of  an  infraction  of  individual  guarantees, 
in  conformity  to  Article  963  of  the  Penal  Code  of  the  district,  to  be 
enforced  in  the  whole  Republic. 

Art.  20.  All  religious  societies  whose  individuals  live  under  certain 
peculiar  laws  by  virtue  of  promises  or  temporary  or  perpetual  vows 
subject  to  one  or  more  superiors,  even  when  the  individuals  of  the 
orders  shall  live  in  different  places,  shall  be  considered  monastic  orders 
in  conformity  with  the  foregoing  article. — 

(1)  The  clergy  and  the  army  were  tried  by  their  own  courts. 

19 


REPLY  OF  CARDINAL  FARLEY. 


New  York  Times — 

Cardinal  Farley  made  the  following  statement  from  his  residence, 
452  Madison  Avenue : 

New  York,  March  4,  1916. 

To  the  Editor  of  The  New  York  Times: 

Page  seven  of  today’s  issue  of  The  New  York  Times  has  a reference 
to  and  long  quotations  from  a pamphlet  entitled  “What  the  Catholic 
Church  Has  Done  to  Mexico,”  by  Dr.  A.  Paganel  of  Mexico  City. 
This  document  has  been  circulated  very  extensively  in  this  country, 
and  has  been  sent  to  the  members  of  Congress.  It  has  never  been  re- 
ferred to  or  quoted  in  the  columns  of  the  metropolitan  press  until  to- 
day. 

Dr.  Paganel  mentions  my  name  twice  in  his  pamphlet,  and  also  prints 
an  affidavit  sworn  to  by  “S.  A.  Zubieta,  a Mexican  Catholic  and  an  ex- 
federal  officer,”  in  which  it  is  charged  that  the  Catholic  Church  in  the 
United  States  is  ready  to  back  a revolution  against  the  Carranza  Gov- 
ernment with  $10,000,000. 

First  of  all  a charge  is  made  that  “one  of  the  reasons  for  the  in- 
sistent demand  that  Vera  Cruz  should  be  put  under  American  control, 
was  that  the  seaport  was  an  ideal  spot  for  revolutionary  intrigue,  first 
for  its  nearness  to  the  capital  and  secondly  because  the  clericals,  under 
the  shadow  of  the  American  flag,  could  continue  formenting  revolts 
until  a clerical  had  been  placed  in  power  in  Mexico  City.”  The  only 
revolts  fomented  under  the  shadow  of  the  flag  in  Vera  Cruz  were  the 
stories  of  the  outraged  nuns  and  persecuted  priests  and  Bishops,  who 
sought  refuge  and  sanctuary  there,  and  who  consequently  were  able 
to  tell  the  world  the  real  nature  of  the  task  undertaken  by  the  great 
pacifist,  Don  Venustiano  Carranza. 

Major  Joyce’s  Charges. 

Major  Francis  Joyce,  Catholic  Chaplain  of  the  Fourteenth  Regiment 
of  Artillery,  is  charged  with  having  sent  copies  of  the  stories  told  him 
by  the  refugees  in  Vera  Cruz  to  “Cardinal  Farley  and  to  the  Hon. 
William  J.  Bryan  in  Washington.”  Any  fair-minded  citizen  of  this 
country  will  scarcely  find  fault  with  the  Major’s  action.  He  wanted 
both  the  Government  of  the  country  and  the  representatives  of  the 
Catholic  Church  in  the  United  States  to  know  the  real  condition  of 
affairs.  Major  Joyce’s  communication  to  me  was  confidential.  I have 
had  occasion  to  learn  that  Major  Joyce  told  the  truth,  and  the  progress 
of  events  since  the  American  occupation  of  Vera  Cruz  leads  me  to  be- 
lieve that  he  must  be  a particularly  obnoxious  person  to  the  present 
Government  of  Mexico,  and  to  such  an  apologist  as  the  writer  of  the 
pamphlet  in  question,  because  he  defended  truth  and  justice  and 
morality. 

I am  charged  also  with  having  sent  the  Rev.  Carlos  de  Heredia  to 
Havana  with  instructions  to  interview  the  monks  and  nuns  in  that  city. 

20 


The  only  connection  I have  ever  had  with  the  Rev.  Father  Heredia, 
who  was  a Jesuit  refugee  from  Mexico  and  was  in  this  city  during  the 
latter  part  of  1914,  is  that  I listened  to  his  story  on  religious  conditions 
in  Mexico,  and  tried  to  help  some  artist  friend  of  his,  who  was  in  dis- 
tress. Father  Heredia  also  tried  to  make  the  truth  known,  and  fought 
for  justice  and  morality,  and  I have  no  doubt  that  he  is  persona  non 
grata  with  the  Carranzistas. 

A much  more  serious  charge,  however,  is  that  quoted  in  the  Times 
this  morning,  that  “the  Catholic  party  of  Mexico  had  already  put  into 
the  hands  of  Felix  Diaz,  through  an  American  prelate,  a check  for 
$100,000,  with  which  Don  Felix  was  to  go  to  Havana  to  rally  his  fol- 
lowers and  begin  his  preparation  to  start  a new  revolution.” 

Quotes  from  Pamphlet. 

The  authority  for  this  statement  seems  to  be  S.  Augusto  Zubieta,  who 
“declared  he  knew  that  the  last  effort  of  the  Catholic  party  was  to  back 
a new  revolutionary  movement,”  etc.  There  follows  in  the  pamphlet 
an  affidavit  sworn  to  by  him  before  William  J.  Berow,  a notary  of  New 
York  County,  on  Feb.  27,  1915.  This  affidavit  reads  as  follows: 

I,  Salvador  A.  Zubieta,  do  hereby  declare  that  on  or  about 
December,  1914,  and  January,  1915,  I had  occasion  to  meet  Car- 
dinal   . and,  talking  over  the  Mexican  situation,  we  discussed 

several  questions  of  importance,  among  them  the  alleged  actions 
of  Carranza  against  the  Catholic  Church,  and  he  confided  to  me 
that  the  Catholics  in  this  country  were  disposed  to  back  a new 
revolution,  of  which  Felix  Diaz  was  to  be  the  head.  The  in 
stigator  of  this  movement  is  the  well-known  murderer,  Cecilio 
Ocon,  who  seems  to  have  gained  the  ear  and  the  confidence  of 

Cardinal  , the  said  Cardinal  having  believed  unquestioningly 

all  the  false  representations  made  by  this  unscrupulous  murderer. 
The  Cardinal  also  asked  if  I would  help  in  this,  probably  because 
he  thought  my  family  connections  in  Mexico  and  the  fact  of  my 
being  a Catholic  would  gain  some  advantage  to  the  cause.  Car- 
dinal   also  stated  that  many  Catholic  institutions  in  this  coun- 

try were  ready  to  back  this  movement  with  about  $10,000,000. 

Sal.  Augusto  Zubieta. 

New  York  City,  February  27,  1915. 

As  I had  occasion  to  meet  Mr.  Zubieta  in  December,  1914,  (neither 
myself  nor  my  secretary  being  able  to  recall  the  January  meeting),  I 
presume  that  I must  thank  Dr.  Paganel  for  not  mentioning  my  name  in 
such  an  odious  connection.  Colonel  Zubieta,  as  he  represented  himself, 
called  at  my  residence  and  I received  him  and  listened  to  his  account  of 
the  Mexican  difficulties.  Just  at  that  time  I was  listening  to  everyone 
who  could  give  me  any  information  about  Mexico,  as  I had  returned 
shortly  before  from  a rather  extended  trip  to  Europe.  I also  listened 
to  the  story  of  the  Colonel’s  distress,  and  as  the  Colonel  himself  has 
been  kind  enough  to  inform  me,  I sent  him  to  Mr.  Paul  Fuller,  who 
furnished  him  with  a letter  of  introduction  to  a Mr.  W.  S.  Valentine, 

21 


with  whom  he  obtained  employment.  On  December  31,  1914,  Colonel 
Zubieta  wrote  me  the  following  letter : 

Eminence : With  the  greatest  respect  I take  the  liberty  to  ad- 
dress these  lines  to  your  Eminence  in  order  to  expose  my  actual 
unfortunate  situation,  and  respectfully  request  your  kind  assist- 
ance. 

As  directed  by  your  Eminence,  I visited  Mr.  Paul  Fuller,  who 
had  the  kindness  to  provide  me  with  a letter  of  introduction  to 
Mr.  W.  S.  Valentine,  who  employed  me  in  their  service,  but  un- 
happily this  position  lasted  only  two  weeks,  and  now  I have  the 
misfortune  to  find  myself  again  under  the  same  sad  conditions. 
My  debts  are  increasing  daily,  and  my  credit  in  the  house  where 
I am  boarding  has  already  reached  its  limit. 

Now,  to  add  another  sorrow  to  those  already  weighing  upon  my 
existence  I have  just  received  the  news  that  my  mother’s  health 
is  so  delicate  that  her  life  is  seriously  endangered. 

I beg  to  appeal  to  your  Eminence  as  the  sole  being  on  whom  I 
can  place  my  only  hopes  for  assistance,  with  the  assurance  that  if 
you  should  have  the  kindness  to  provide  me  with  the  means  to  re- 
turn to  my  country,  I shall  not  only  return  to  your  Eminence  the 
amount  received,  but  also  be  thankful  to  you  for  life. 

I pray  that  your  Eminence  may  enjoy  the  best  health,  and, 
wishing  for  your  Excellence  a happy  and  bright  New  Year,  I re- 
main very  respectfully  yours, 

Col.  Salv.  Augusto  Zubieta. 

Sent  Aid  to  Zubieta. 

In  reply  to  this  very  touching  appeal  I sent  through  my  secretary, 
the  Rev.  Thomas  G.  Carroll,  a check  for  $25  with  the  following  note: 

January  8,  1915. 

Dear  Colonel : His  Eminence,  the  Cardinal  Archbishop,  directs 
me  to  forward  you  the  inclosed  amount,  ($25),  in  reply  to  your 
request  of  the  31st  ult.,  and  regrets  that  he  has  overlooked  the 
matter  until  now.  He  hopes  this  will  not  arrive  too  late,  and  is 
sorry  to  learn  that  your  mother  is  unwell.  With  best  wishes,  I am 
sincerely  yours, 

Thomas  G.  Carroll,  Secretary. 
Colonel  Salvator  A.  Zubieta,  162  West  Eightieth  Street. 

Colonel  Zubieta  never  acknowledged  the  receipt  of  my  charity,  nor 
have  I ever  heard  from  him  since.  I know  that  he  indorsed  the  check 
to  some  one  named  Alice  Gonzalez,  and  as  I think  of  the  matter  now 
1 wonder  why  I did  not  draw  on  the  large  revolutionary  fund  at  my  dis- 
posal to  be  of  greater  assistance  to  the  Colonel. 

I think  Colonel  Zubieta’s  letter  to  me  offers  sufficient  denial  of  the 
charges  he  makes,  and  I consider  that  the  publication  of  it  is  another 

22 


evidence  of  the  methods  employed  by  the  present  Government  in  Mex- 
ico to  discredit  its  opponents. 

Because  I frankly  admit  that  I am  opposed  to  this  Government, 
which  has  established  itself  by  appealing  to  the  worst  elements  in  the 
country  and  secured  its  power  and  ascendency  in  the  early  stages  of  its 
growth  bv  disregarding  every  principle  of  justice  and  morality.  And 
T am  confident  that  the  day  is  not  far  distant  when  the  great  mass  of 
the  Mexican  people  will  be  released  from  the  tyrannical  yoke  that  it 
has  imposed  on  them.  What  Dr.  Paganel  and  his  friends  are  really 
anxious  about  is  that  the  world  may  not  learn  what  the  present  Con- 
stitutionalist Government  has  done  to  Mexico  and  the  Catholic  Church 
in  Mexico. 

John  Cardinal  Farley, 
Archbishop  of  New  York. 


An  impartial  reading  of  Cardinal  Farley’s  letter  to  the  Times  in 
replv  to  the  accusations  and  the  affidavit  of  Col.  S.  A.  Zubieta  brings 
forth  first  one  glaring  fact,  that  the  Cardinal  does  not  deny  flatly  the 
charges  made  by  Col.  Zubieta,  but  devotes  almost  a column  of  space 
to  incriminations  of  bad  faith,  ingratitude  against  the  Colonel. 

Tt  does  not  seem  clear  how  the  publication  of  the  letters  of  S.  A. 
Zubieta  makes  the  charge  less  serious.  It  simply  proves  that  the 
gratitude  towards  the  benefactor  could  not  stand  the  strain  of  indig- 
nation and  patriotism  of  a Mexican  soldier  and  a Catholic,  who  dis- 
covered that  foreign  prelates  were  plotting  to  plunge  Mexico  into 
another  civil  war. 

Secondly,  the  name  of  the  Cardinal  was  not  mentioned  in  the  affi- 
davit: there  are  other  Cardinals  in  America. 

Third,  the  Cardinal  is  very  generous  with  the  words,  truth,  justice 
and  morality. 

Is  it  considered  truthful,  just  and  moral  by  the  Cardinals,  the  Right 
Reverends  and  Reverends  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  America  to  speak 
of  the  persecutions  of  the  nuns  and  friars  in  Mexico  and  never  men- 
tion the  fact  that  their  very  presence  there  (disguised  as  civilians)  is 
against  the  laws  of  Mexico  and  has  been  so  since  1859?  To  speak 
and  publish  broadcast  about  the  destruction  of  Church  property,  when 
it  is  well  known  that  the  Catholic  Church  has  not  legally  owned  any 
property  in  Mexico  since  1859?  Is  it  considered  moral  and  just  by 
Christian  prelates  to  foment  trouble,  discord  and  finance  a revolution 
in  a foreign  country,  for  the  sake  of  revenge  or  for  the  purpose  of 
acquiring  temporal  power? 

The  war  of  1847  had  been  represented  in  the  Mexican  papers,  of 
the  time,  as  being,  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  a war  of  rapine 
and  plunder,  a war  on  “impiety”  conducted  by  heretics,  who  were 

23 


bent  on  robbing  the  churches  and  destroying  true  religion. 

At  present,  and  for  over  a year,  the  Mexican  clericals  in  conjunction 
with  the  American  clericals  have  joined  in  a campaign  of  vilification 
against  the  Mexicans  and  active  propaganda  for  American  Interven- 
tion. 

It  seems  grotesque  that  the  American  clericals  do  not  realize  the 
immorality  of  their  demands:  that  the  United  States  Government 
should  invade  Mexico,  kill  several  thousand  Mexicans  and  Americans, 
spend  several  millions  of  the  tax  payers  money  for  the  sake  of  aveng- 
ing the  persecutions  and  death  of  foreign  nuns  and  monks  who  were 
outlawed  and  the  restoration  of  property  which  does  not  belong  to 
them  ? 

The  American  clericals  are  befogging  the  issue  by  trying  to  make  it 
appear  a religious  instead  of  a political  question.  The  American 
Catholics  are  not  such  children  and  dunces  as  to  be  forever  deceived 
by  evasions  and  misrepresentations.  Truth,  justice  and  morality  will 
out,  like  murder. 

One  thing  can  be  safely  prophesied : the  Mexicans  have  released 
themselves  of  the  tyrannical  yoke  of  the  clericals  and  their  political 
rule  in  Mexico  and  they  will  never  zvillingly  and  freely  place  themselves 
under  their  rule  again. 

The  American  prelates  and  the  American  Catholic  politicians  had 
better  keep  away  and  not  meddle  in  Mexican  politics — or  they  might 
burn  their  fingers  in  the  attempt. 


